Building Consensus on the Relevant Criteria to Screen for Depressive Symptoms Among Near-Centenarians and Centenarians: Modified e-Delphi Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The number of centenarians worldwide is expected to increase dramatically, reaching 3.4 million by 2050 and >25 million by 2100. Despite these projections, depression remains a prevalent yet underdiagnosed and undertreated condition among this population that carries significant health risks. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to identify and achieve consensus on the most representative signs and symptoms of depression in near-centenarians and centenarians (aged ≥95 years) through an e-Delphi study with an international and interdisciplinary panel of experts. Ultimately, the outcomes of this study might help create a screening instrument that is specifically designed for this unique population. METHODS: A modified e-Delphi study was carried out to achieve expert consensus on depressive symptoms in near-centenarians and centenarians. A panel of 28 international experts was recruited. Consensus was defined as 70% agreement on the relevance of each item. Data were collected through a web-based questionnaire over 3 rounds. Experts rated 104 items that were divided into 24 dimensions and 80 criteria to identify the most representative signs and symptoms of depression in this age group. RESULTS: The panel consisted of experts from various countries, including physicians with experience in old age psychiatry or geriatrics as well as nurses and psychologists. The response rate remained consistent over the rounds (20/28, 71% to 21/28, 75%). In total, 4 new dimensions and 8 new criteria were proposed by the experts, and consensus was reached on 86% (24/28) of the dimensions and 80% (70/88) of the criteria. The most consensual potentially relevant dimensions were lack of hope (21/21, 100%), loss of interest (27/28, 96%), lack of reactivity to pleasant events (27/28, 96%), depressed mood (26/28, 93%), and previous episodes of depression or diagnosed depression (19/21, 90%). In addition, the most consensual potentially relevant criteria were despondency, gloom, and despair (25/25, 100%); depressed (27/27, 100%); lack of reactivity to pleasant events or circumstances (28/28, 100%); suicidal ideation (28/28, 100%); suicide attempt(s) (28/28, 100%); ruminations (27/28, 96%); recurrent thoughts of death or suicide (27/28, 96%); feelings of worthlessness (25/26, 96%); critical life events (20/21, 95%); anhedonia (20/21, 95%); loss of interest in activities (26/28, 93%); loss of pleasure in activities (26/28, 93%); and sadness (24/26, 92%). Moreover, when assessing depression in very old age, the duration, number, frequency, and severity of signs and symptoms should also be considered, as evidenced by the high expert agreement. CONCLUSIONS: The classification of most elements as relevant highlights the importance of a multidimensional approach for optimal depression screening among individuals of very old age. This study offers a first step toward improving depression assessment in near-centenarians and centenarians. The development of a more adapted screening tool could improve early detection and intervention, enhancing the quality of mental health care for this population.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.122 | 0.135 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".